Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Dd714 did a wonderful job explaining. You know a lot more about the subject than I will claim to.
I will add, though: The left/right labels have evolved in definition over the years. In the 1920s, Fascism was consistent with the general Right wing ideologies of the time throughout the world which favoured publicly owned companies being a force of dominance in major industries. Take Canada for example, we had Air Canada, Canadian Pacific and Canadian National railways, Petro Canada, the Canadian Wheat Board, etc. These were established under the Conservative governments and privatized by Conservative governments in the 1980s onward. Maoist theory was undeniably leftist but the “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” from Deng onwards in my opinion has much more in common with Fascist Italy than the Marxist-Leninist Soviet Union.
Most people I speak to in my private life about politics generally think of left wing/right wing as it applies to Canadian (and from the news, American) social issues. I don’t think it’s fair to say things like LGBT rights or womens, ethnic minorities rights are a clearly defined left or right issue, but from a Eurocentric point of view, the CCP is definitely further to the right on many social issues. Look at the CCP recent ban on “effeminate” men on television, for example. Or the scapegoating of Muslims.
Tiananmen was about the consequences of economic reforms, and about corruption.
The protests were not about democracy initially, only after they got hijacked by the CIA and the radicals it paid to infiltrate and hijack the protests.
The West has a naive, wrong image of HK. HK has not democratic tradition. Up until pretty much the end, HK was a colony ruled from London. Only towards the end did they introduce a bit of democracy, but it was limited. And it was a mess. HK politics was paralyzed for a long time because of all the radicals, traitors, and saboteurs.
The massive protests a few years ago started not because of democracy, but because of the planned extradition law. That law had no political background, though, it was a project deemed necessary when a HK guy murdered his girlfriend while they were in Taiwan. Then he returned and could not be tried because there was no extradition. So, there was the initiative to create a mutual extradition system for the PRC, HK, Macau and Taiwan. But criminals in HK were afraid they might actually get punished for their crimes committed on or against the mainland. Especially Americans and Brits were afraid of that law, so they staged all those protests behind the scenes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
You have posted this video multiple times before and I explained why it is wrong.
Paying a New Zealander to read a CCP script is not convincing, if you have some decent arguments, say it yourself.
Most people in China have no idea how to even vote, let alone who the candidates are, that is a fact.
The ones who had the opportunity to vote told me that they had some students come to their dorm and ask them to vote. They had no idea who the candidates were, had no privacy and was told who to vote for.
Just because his video is published on a Chinese channel does not mean he is reading a CCP script. The thing is, he has no choice because Western media are totally biased and corrupt, in short propaganda outlets.
Students, dorms?! I live in Portugal. And you know what, students that study in Lisbon or Porto are often from other parts of the country, and they have no clue who the candidates are in Lisbon or Porto. And what for, they can't vote in Lisbon or Porto, anyway, but only where they are registered, i.e. their hometowns. Hardly any students officially move to Lisbon or Porto. Only in that case could they vote there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 415_s2k
- LGBTQ rights & representation
- minority rights & representation
- freedom of expression
- exposure of and to dissenting viewpoints
- freedom of literature and arts
- immigration rights
- freedom of the press and access to, and of, foreign media
- government propaganda and nationalist narratives in public schools
- access to public schools in the first place
... China fails miserably on all of the above but yeah kids, let's watch this CCPTVCGTV propaganda. It says the opposite of what the west says do it much be true!
china #1
Being Asians, most Chinese are socially conservative. LGBT is indeed an exception.
Most of the other things you listed have nothing to do with left vs right, though.
Immigration to a certain extent, yes. But China is simply not an immigrant country, unlike Australia or the US. In fact, there is more resistance to immigration in the US than there is in China.
But really, freedom of press and access to foreign media have nothing to do with left vs right. China keeping out foreign media makes total sense, because they remember the regime-change propaganda the VOA and other foreign outlets dumped on China in 1989. I read something funny recently, namely that American politicians classify other countries' freedom of press based on whether or not the US apparatus is able to make its propaganda reach the people of other countries.
Access to public schools?! China is full of public schools, what are you talking about?!
Nationalist narratives?! As if that were any different in the US, where kids sing the national anthem, and learn rewritten history with giant holes in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
A lot wrong here
1. Left and right is relative to where and when you live. Being right wing is quite different in the USA today and in Sweden in the 1970s. Facism is not defined by being right or left as there is no clear definition of right and left.
2. Facism is an ideology that promotes hypernationalism, military, supremacy and asking people and businesses to sacrifice for the nation. That sounds a lot more like China than the USA.
3. China is "right" in a lot more ways than LGBT. China has a regressive tax system, not free health care and a hukou system that prevents migrant workers from having rights in the cities they live.
1. Wrong, fascism only refers to the right wing.
To quote the very first paragraph from Wiki:
Quote:
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism[1] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy[2] that rose to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.[3][4] The first fascist movements emerged in Italy during World War I, before spreading to other European countries.[3] Opposed to anarchism, democracy, liberalism, and Marxism,[5] fascism is placed on the far right-wing within the traditional left–right spectrum.[3][6]
2. Nope, that is just your definition based on what you like and don't like. And the things you listed sound a lot more like the US than China. Who has the biggest military, the biggest military budget, does the most wars/coups/invasions, etc.?
China is typically East Asian in that society is above the individual. No different in Japan or Taiwan. In fact, when society is the number one priority, that is very much left-wing thinking. The US is the opposite.
Would you consider Kennedy a right-wing guy when he said: "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country?"
3. The Chinese system is constantly changing, the Hukou system is being adapted and updated, but remains where it makes sense. They want to avoid the typical problems found in cities in other developing countries, with slums etc. https://www.china-briefing.com/news/...-hukou-system/
China does have free universal healthcare, unlike the US:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714
You are confusing your politics as the western democracies define them. Leftist is not fascist, and the mere definition of both doesn't not translate well to political systems in other countries.
The Peoples Republic of China is officially a Marxist-Leninist socialist republic. The "republic" is not really accurate however because they have only one political party, and the few local representatives that the people are allowed to vote for are pre-selected by the party, and are simply rubber stamp type representatives. Unofficially, it's an authoritative state, bordering on totalitarianism - centrally controlled, lack of political plurality, and suppression of certain personal rights and freedoms.
Let me give you Politics 101 as it relates to China:
Left wing politics support social equality. That is of course the central principle of Marxist theory but modern China (as well as every country that has tried to implement a communist government) strived from that into there own version of communism which includes a stratified society with oppression to political and religious groups, social credit systems, and of course it's evolution into there version of capitalism which has dramatically increased the inequality of wealth distribution.
Fascism is associated with an authoritative (i.e. China) ultra-nationalistic (i.e. China) state with elements of political suppression (i.e. China), and a strong central government (i.e. China). However note that many elements of Fascism are hard to pin down and seem contradictory, and now calling anything "fascist" is simply meant as a meaningless glib insult without any relevance or understanding of what exactly fascism is. In particular, the Nazi regime was socialist in terms of it's economic system in regards to the central control of its industries. This still gives socialists the willys as they try to reject that that regime was socialist, but there you go, economically they most certainly were. I submit that the Fascist economic model is very similar to the one in place in China: Capitalist yes, but heavily controlled and managed by "the party" as a sort of silent or not-so-silent partner making the actual decisions.
"Republic" has nothing to do with the number of parties, or the existence of any party for that matter.
Here in Portugal there will be general elections next weekend, and the candidates are also pre-selected. In fact, we can't even elect candidates, but only parties, who then get a certain number of seats, which they can fill as they please.
China is not centrally controlled at all, not more so than the US or the EU. In China there is a lot of experimentation on the local level, many cities do their own thing. The Chinese system is a work in progress, never finished. Unlike the Western system which has been stagnating for decades because people live under the illusion that their system is great the way it is.
I agree with hardly anything of the rest you wrote. You have no idea how the system works. There is nothing fascist about China, it is patriotic, but not ultra-nationalistic. It was high time the Chinese became proud of their country and culture, which is what disturbs the West, which has always tried to make people in the Global South feel bad about themselves.
And no, there was not much socialist about the Nazis. In fact, the Nazis sent socialists and communists to concentration camps. For some time initially the Nazis were a bit lost between left and right, they hated everyone left and right, and didn't really know what they wanted. Their party arose out of a workers party, but that legacy got lost over time and the Nazis heavily relied on money from companies. But the Nazis did not make the companies' decisions, it was not state-run companies. Companies merely sucked up to the Nazi regime because they expected benefits from doing so.
About half of the Chinese economy on the other hand is state-run, so naturally the state is involved in decisions. State-run companies are typical of leftist countries.
China does have free universal healthcare, unlike the US:
.
In my city, non employed and informally employed need to pay 4000 a year to get health insurance. Even if you pay, it will only cover half the cost for large treatments.
Why are you even talking about China, you clearly know nothing about China. Have you ever lived in China or are you some portuguese communist who is getting all your info from pro-CCP forums?
"Republic" has nothing to do with the number of parties, or the existence of any party for that matter.
Here in Portugal there will be general elections next weekend, and the candidates are also pre-selected. In fact, we can't even elect candidates, but only parties, who then get a certain number of seats, which they can fill as they please.
China is not centrally controlled at all, not more so than the US or the EU. In China there is a lot of experimentation on the local level, many cities do their own thing. The Chinese system is a work in progress, never finished. Unlike the Western system which has been stagnating for decades because people live under the illusion that their system is great the way it is.
I agree with hardly anything of the rest you wrote. You have no idea how the system works. There is nothing fascist about China, it is patriotic, but not ultra-nationalistic. It was high time the Chinese became proud of their country and culture, which is what disturbs the West, which has always tried to make people in the Global South feel bad about themselves.
And no, there was not much socialist about the Nazis. In fact, the Nazis sent socialists and communists to concentration camps. For some time initially the Nazis were a bit lost between left and right, they hated everyone left and right, and didn't really know what they wanted. Their party arose out of a workers party, but that legacy got lost over time and the Nazis heavily relied on money from companies. But the Nazis did not make the companies' decisions, it was not state-run companies. Companies merely sucked up to the Nazi regime because they expected benefits from doing so.
About half of the Chinese economy on the other hand is state-run, so naturally the state is involved in decisions. State-run companies are typical of leftist countries.
Let's see, where do I start.
"Republic" is defined as power by the people and/or elected representatives. By extension, a state having one political party only and limited elections is not a republic. Portugal in contrast is a multi-party state with a directly elected president as I understand, thus they are a republic. Many of the countries today by the way have "republic" in their official government title. Likewise many of them, including China, are NOT republics using the common definition of the term (an extreme example is North Korea with the official name of "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea"). China is neither a republic or a democracy.
Next, centrally controlled. China is most certainly centrally controlled. The U.S. in contrast is decentralized, with much power given to the state and local governments. There is also a system of checks and balances in the separation of judicial, executive, and legislative branches. On paper, it appears that China has regional political structures and different government bodies but they are just rubber stamps reporting to one central authority - CCP. There is no system of checks or balances.
Regarding socialism and the National Socialist Workers (Nazi) Party vs. PRC: The Nazi's were not socialist in terms of it's social model, and indeed they had an ideological hatred of communism, nor are Chines Nazi's. But socialism is an economic model as well as a political and social model. I explained how the economic models are similar. Both socialism/communism and fascism embrace central planning of the economy. Nazis indeed did manage decisions of it's industries (regardless if they were state-run or not), as does China.
In my city, non employed and informally employed need to pay 4000 a year to get health insurance. Even if you pay, it will only cover half the cost for large treatments.
Why are you even talking about China, you clearly know nothing about China. Have you ever lived in China or are you some portuguese communist who is getting all your info from pro-CCP forums?
Universal healthcare is limited everywhere. Here in Portugal for instance it does not cover dentistry, so people have to pay that out of their own pockets or get some extra insurance. Not to mention that people have to pay a little fee every time they see a doctor or get some medicine.
Not to mention that it is not free anywhere, all citizens pay for it with their taxes or social security contributions.
Dd714 did a wonderful job explaining. You know a lot more about the subject than I will claim to.
I will add, though: The left/right labels have evolved in definition over the years. In the 1920s, Fascism was consistent with the general Right wing ideologies of the time throughout the world which favoured publicly owned companies being a force of dominance in major industries. Take Canada for example, we had Air Canada, Canadian Pacific and Canadian National railways, Petro Canada, the Canadian Wheat Board, etc. These were established under the Conservative governments and privatized by Conservative governments in the 1980s onward. Maoist theory was undeniably leftist but the “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” from Deng onwards in my opinion has much more in common with Fascist Italy than the Marxist-Leninist Soviet Union.
Most people I speak to in my private life about politics generally think of left wing/right wing as it applies to Canadian (and from the news, American) social issues. I don’t think it’s fair to say things like LGBT rights or womens, ethnic minorities rights are a clearly defined left or right issue, but from a Eurocentric point of view, the CCP is definitely further to the right on many social issues. Look at the CCP recent ban on “effeminate” men on television, for example. Or the scapegoating of Muslims.
Canadian Pacific was and is a private company. They were incorporated in 1881 and were selling stocks by 1883.
They were though, working under a government contract.
Let's see, where do I start.
"Republic" is defined as power by the people and/or elected representatives. By extension, a state having one political party only and limited elections is not a republic. Portugal in contrast is a multi-party state with a directly elected president as I understand, thus they are a republic. Many of the countries today by the way have "republic" in their official government title. Likewise many of them, including China, are NOT republics using the common definition of the term (an extreme example is North Korea with the official name of "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea"). China is neither a republic or a democracy.
Next, centrally controlled. China is most certainly centrally controlled. The U.S. in contrast is decentralized, with much power given to the state and local governments. There is also a system of checks and balances in the separation of judicial, executive, and legislative branches. On paper, it appears that China has regional political structures and different government bodies but they are just rubber stamps reporting to one central authority - CCP. There is no system of checks or balances.
Regarding socialism and the National Socialist Workers (Nazi) Party vs. PRC: The Nazi's were not socialist in terms of it's social model, and indeed they had an ideological hatred of communism, nor are Chines Nazi's. But socialism is an economic model as well as a political and social model. I explained how the economic models are similar. Both socialism/communism and fascism embrace central planning of the economy. Nazis indeed did manage decisions of it's industries (regardless if they were state-run or not), as does China.
"By extension", that is only your opinion. Political parties are not necessary for a country to be a republic. Basically, a republic today simply means not a monarchy.
North Korea is completely different from China, be it in politics, economics or whatever.
China is not centrally controlled. The provinces have more independence than, say, the states of Germany or the US, where in the case of conflict the federal level overrides the state level. If necessary before the supreme court.
Nope, companies in Nazi-Germany were normal companies, many of them still exist today. And just like 80 or so years ago, they still manipulate politics.
There is no central planning of the economy in China. There certainly are 5- and 15-year plans that decide on the priorities of the overall economic development. The EU does the same thing.
But Beijing does not tell Huawei what to do or not to do. The Chinese economy is market-based, just like it already was in the Middle Ages. If anything the Chinese economy is typical Chinese again, with a healthy mix of both state-run and private enterprises.
"By extension", that is only your opinion. Political parties are not necessary for a country to be a republic. Basically, a republic today simply means not a monarchy.
North Korea is completely different from China, be it in politics, economics or whatever.
China is not centrally controlled. The provinces have more independence than, say, the states of Germany or the US, where in the case of conflict the federal level overrides the state level. If necessary before the supreme court.
Nope, companies in Nazi-Germany were normal companies, many of them still exist today. And just like 80 or so years ago, they still manipulate politics.
There is no central planning of the economy in China. There certainly are 5- and 15-year plans that decide on the priorities of the overall economic development. The EU does the same thing.
But Beijing does not tell Huawei what to do or not to do. The Chinese economy is market-based, just like it already was in the Middle Ages. If anything the Chinese economy is typical Chinese again, with a healthy mix of both state-run and private enterprises.
Well I told you the definition of republic - you tell me, is China governed by elected representatives? I am not talking about these local reps that rubber stamp anything the PRC tells them to do.
But, lesson time again:
China is centrally controlled. This shouldn't even be subject to a debate. The provinces operate under the strict control and approval of the NPC (National Peoples Congress), equivalent to the US congress except they aren't elected and report to the one party PRC (so really no equivalence). In other words, the local provinces have absolutely no control except for maybe budget/expense allocations. The only semi-autonmous provinces are Hong Kong and Macau but as we both know those are crumbling fast.
Central planned economies is a system in which the government makes decisions regarding the manufacture and distribution of product, it's an element of both communism and fascism. It doesn't matter if the companies are state run or private. In contrast, the EU and the US have market planning economies (based on supply and demand). Individual companies in China may be based on this principle but the PRC determines the goals, the strategies, and the targets.
Huawei's executives are PRC party members, support the internet firewalls and internet surveillance activities of China, and have been linked with Chinese surveillance activities in western countries. By the way do you know what Huawei means? "China has promise". Not "Imagination at Work" (GE), "Advancement through Technology" (Audi), "5G done right" (Verizon)...but make China better. Yeah, tells you what it's purpose is.
Look, dude, every post here is basically telling you that you are misguided. Do you think everyone is wrong and you alone are right?
Well yeah, it's not hard to believe that capitalism does not lead to democracy. As I said in another post China is now like one big corporation with its own branding and Xi Jin Ping is its CEO. All the underlings in a corporation must do as the CEO says and they must all perform to the best of expectations right? How different is that from working for a private corporation in a Western nation? Do corporate employees get to publicly criticize their company policy or openly make fun of their bosses on social media without repercussions? Is that realm what you call a free and liberal democracy?
If you check your own link, it clearly states that 5% doesn't have any health insurance. How does that happen if it is free like you expect?
And the fact that you need to ask which currency it is, show us that you don't know how health care or anything else work in China. You are just reading pro-CCP forums and making up things as you go. I know it cost 4000, because I live in China and we need to pay that for my wife every year.
I recommend you to actually live in China for a few years. You might still be pro-CCP, but at least you will know the basics of Chinese society.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
